If you could visit any city in the world, which city would you pick and why?

That’s an interesting question, I always wanted to travel around the world.

There are many places I would like to visit (not just limited to cities) first. Waiting for time and the opportunity to present itself. I would love to go to New York, for pretty much everything. NY is like the bigger better version of my home city Bombay (I guess). I want to visit Los Angeles and San Diego too, for being in most awaited events of the year which being E3 and SDCC. Besides always wanted to see Hollywood too. Others being the glorious city of Rome, London, Istanbul, Montreal, Vancouver just to name a few which I can think of at the moment.

Powered by Plinky

Forest Dump

Alright that title was simply referring to the 1994 classic movie Forest Gump.

What do I prefer more between a beach or a forest? Well that is an interesting question. I love forest areas and spent quite some quality time in them. It’s like an isolation away from the current world, to a world of peace. even if it’s not in literal sense. And speaking of beaches, in my great city, that is a joke. There is garbage in the name of beaches here. Heard in some other parts there are good ones, but I don’t recall the last time I’ve spent quality time at one. I would like to be at a good beach one day and sleep on a hammock looking at the ocean and the sun, and thinking about all that happened. I’ll wait for that day. Besides there is a (not so kid friendly) thing here on my bucket list too.

Powered by Plinky

Live and die on this day

Looking at today’s daily prompt, I find it quite astounding that just in one of my previous posts I had wrote pertaining to survival, which inspired me to give this title and this being a continuation of sorts. So after reading R v Dudley and Stephens I like most have mixed feelings about this.

So firstly, long story short, if you didn’t bother reading the wiki article which is still small, four crewmen of an English yacht, the Mignonette, who were cast away in a storm some 1,600 miles from the Cape of Good Hope, were stranded in a life boat. They were Tom Dudley, the captain; Edwin Stephens; Edmund Brooks; and Richard Parker, the cabin boy. Parker was 17 years old and an inexperienced seaman.  After a weeks of survival with no food or water, facing a storm, fighting a shark and resorting to drink their own urine for surviving. Parker fell ill and subsequently in coma due to a combination of famine and drinking sea water. After several discussions of sacrificing one so that the other three may live, Dudley with the aid of Stephens killed Parker (killing him before his natural death would make it possible for them to drink his blood) and the three lived on eating his flesh. They were rescued four days later.

After their rescue, this sparked quite a controversy among law makers, seamen, and the public, which developed a crucial ruling on necessity on modern law. The main question however here: Is what Dudley did defensible?

This is not a simple yes or no answerable question, it has certain multiple sides to it. The question is not about whether what he did was right or wrong, but more of necessity and subsequently survival. Firstly Dudley was the captain, and wasn’t it that the captain goes down with the ship? He was the one who ultimately decided that one down is better than four. Was it justified? Not necessarily. Was it practical? Yes. In that situation that was the only practical thing which could have been done, the other option was to wait it out with the possibility of dying. And the instinct of survival is in all living creatures. Who wants to die? (unless you life is a complete mess and you think of kill yourself)

What I find very frustrating was the fact that the reason that Dudley and Stephens were family men so ‘their lives were more important’. What makes their lives more important than the other(s)? And wasn’t the Custom of the Sea that the captain goes down with the ship?

Coming to me, What would I have done? Well I’m not in that situation so I can’t answer honestly. But if it would arise, then I would take the practical route as always and would have gone that course just like them. And if I were in the place of Parker, I would prefer a swift death than suffering (saying purely in such a context only). I’m not going to see how I’m feasted upon after I’m dead right? But in all reality, I would honestly prefer to live it out, and die fighting for survival, if there was any hope of no one getting killed. But again, we can’t say for certain without being the situation itself, and while each life is valuable, who decides that? Like I said in my previous post, live and die on this day.

And lastly, I again found it bit funny that the recent very hit and a moving movie on survival, Life of Pi, the tiger’s name is also Richard Parker. And it has the exact same context as here, you would have realized that if you have seen it, if not I recommend that you do. Looking at my posts, I should perhaps recommend a movie/book in each of my posts now right?

Sweet Sixteen

When I was 16, I never thought life would be so messed up, boring and insane all at the same time, precisely for one reason – I didn’t have any big expectations from myself.

Rewinding back to those days, that was quite an ‘eventful’ year if I may put it. Most significant in my personal life were these 2: meeting my one of my idols, former president of India Dr, APJ Abdul Kalam on 13 February 2008 (followed by another insignificant boring birthday and the much hyped 10th grade exams in the country) and the change of a lifestyle when I went to another place (Kota, Rajasthan) for the ‘pre-engineering training’ and 2 years of high school.

It was quite a year. I went out of home because I always wanted to get out of this place and see the world. Though now I’m back here for some years and don’t know when I’ll hit the road sky/ocean next. Time will tell.

So that is how I picture my life in the years ahead, whichever path my professional(?) interests leads me to. But as I said, I didn’t quite have any expectations and as the saying goes ‘flowing with the tide’ or whatever that is.

“To grow, to discover, we need involvement which is something I experience everyday, sometimes good, sometimes frustrating.”

– Bruce Lee


Vagabonding is about taking time off from your normal life – from six weeks to four months to two years – to discover and experience the world on your own terms – Rolf Potts

Taking time off from your ‘normal life’, just that in my case, I want that to be ‘my normal life’! Generally when we hear the word ‘vagabond’ we think of person stricken with poverty/unemployment or just simply a fool wandering from place to place. But in reality, (or so I would like to think it that way) I would want to be a vagabond (my kind old man already claims I’m one of sorts), travel around the world, meet new people, see and do things which I always wanted to, get familiar with lot of new things which I might have never heard before, (it’s all about vaga-bonding right?) and live on the go.

Oh how I dream of such an ideal job. Looks like I’ll have to do a lot for that. The world seems small yet so large. (And I’ll keep my love for paradoxes for later)

Powered by Plinky